I came back on here to start a thread on the Florida amendments. I may only change one or two votes, but it might be enough. Amendment 1: Increased Homestead Property Tax Exemption My father voted no on this because he said it favors the rich. I voted yes because any tax break is better than no tax break. Amendment 2: Limitations on Property Tax Exemptions This is just a continuation of a previously existing limitation that taxes can only go up by 10% or less per year, which is pretty damned high anyway. A failure of the amendment means the provision ends Jan. 2019. I voted yes. Amendment 3: Voter Control of Gambling in Florida At first glance, this seems like the casinos trying to make an end-run around the legislature, but on closer inspection, it turns out that getting voter approval of any new casinos would actually be much more difficult than getting legislative approval, so I voted yes. Amendment 4: Voting Restoration Amendment This is the Democrats trying to restore voting rights to millions of felons who would then vote Democrat and turn Florida into another California. Vote no. Amendment 5: Supermajority Vote Required to Impose, Authorize, or Raise State Taxes or Fees YES, YES, YES. Will that make life harder for the Florida legislature? It damn sure will. But just think if this provision had been in place when the legislature voted to raise the state vehicle license tag fee to $400 for new tags. Amendment 6: Rights of Crime Victims There are actually three parts to this amendment, so I don't know why the Supreme Court authorized it. The first is the so-called Marsy's Law, which is problematic in itself. Florida, unlike many other states, does a damn good job of locking up criminals and protecting victims, so I don't really think this law is necessary. We have a presumption of innocence for a reason, and granting victims rights complicates that presumption. The second part requires judges to independently interpret statutes rather than give deference to government agencies' interpretations. While this may sound good in theory, government agencies (in Florida, anyway) typically carry out the wishes of the legislature and don't go inventing their own interpretations. Judges typically do just the opposite. Administrative law judges are appointed to their positions just like court judges, so I can't see any particular difference there. So I don't see the need for this section, either. The third part raises the mandatory retirement age for judges to 75. I would throw out any mandatory retirement age, but otherwise, this is the only part of the amendment I can go along with. So no on Amendment 6. Amendment 7: First Responder and Military Member Survivor Benefits I don't like this trend of giving preferential treatment to certain members of the public based on their previous job, and now in this case, to certain members of the public based on their father's previous job. It smacks of a kind of unnatural elitism, like a club only certain people are allowed to get into. And this club isn't based on merit or worth, it's based on what your occupation is or was, or in this case, whether or not you managed to get yourself killed in the carrying out of that occupation. So that's reason enough to vote no. But there are two further provisions: one to require a supermajority to raise university fees, which would be fine by me but only applies to state universities; and one that would write the university system into the state constitution, which is definitely unnecessary. There is no Amendment 8. Amendment 9: Prohibits Offshore Oil Drilling; Prohibits Vaping Indoors Another amendment that I don't know how it made it past the Supreme Court's requirement that all amendments cover ONE issue only. While I would support the latter amendment, the former is too oppressive to support, so I voted no. While I am supportive of environmental issues, a) offshore drilling is a federal issue, not a state one, and b) crippling our ability to drill our own oil keeps us dependent on foreign sources such as the Middle East and Venezuela, and no one wants that. And as far as I have seen, nearly all places that have no smoking signs have started including vaping as a form of smoking that is not allowed, so I don't really think it's necessary to ban it officially. Amendment 10: State and Local Government Structure and Operation This is a tough one. There are so many issues to consider that both yes and no votes can be supported, even from a conservative point of view. Listing the sections from the Florida Amendment Guide, 1) requires that the legislature provide for a Department of Veteran Affairs... this seems like a waste of money and attention. The state provides very few veteran benefits, so a whole department devoted to it seems like overkill to the nth degree. 2) creates an Office of Domestic Security and Counter-Terrorism... I'm guessing this was in response to the Orlando night club shooting. Again, this isn't a state affair, it's a federal issue, and having the state create an agency to poke its nose into international terrorism activities could have unintended consequences. 3) moves the date of first meeting of the legislature from March to January... okay, fine, whatever, why does this need a constitutional amendment? 4) prevents counties from abolishing certain offices and requires election for those offices, including tax collectors, property appraisers, supervisors of elections, sheriffs, and others... This is where things get complicated. While I'm all in favor of local control of local officials, so mandating election of those officials might seem like a conservative idea, there's also a sense in which this takes away local control, that if a community wants a professional in the post of property appraiser that isn't answerable to the largest property holders in the county, they can't have it. So I voted no. Amendment 11: Property Rights of Foreign-Born Non-Citizens; Removal of Obsolete Provision Regarding High Speed Rail; Clarification of Criminal Statute Language The first part of this seems like a no-brainer: it repeals a provision that states that foreign-born people who are not eligible for citizenship are not allowed to own property in the state. The second part is just clerical; since the high speed rail was cancelled, the provision regarding it is no longer necessary. The third part is somewhat problematic, but there's no requirement that it take effect... it allows for the legislature to modify or eliminate the sentences of criminals convicted of crimes which have since been abolished or modified. So, for example, if someone is in jail for marijuana possession and marijuana possession is legalized, the legislature could release those currently in jail for possession. Under the current law, the legislature cannot act at all. Under the revision, they could but are not required to do so. I think that's reasonable under the circumstances. So yes on 11. Amendment 12: Lobbying and Abuse of Office by Public Officers This one extends a ban on lobbying by former public officials to six years. I was almost convinced by the "con" side in the guide until I read this line: "If legislators want to set guidelines on ethical behavior, they may do so on their own." And someday pigs may fly. Vote yes. Amendment 13: Ends Dog Racing in Florida I voted no on this one for two reasons: 1) I support horse racing, so opposing dog racing seems hypocritical; 2) dog racing, by the guide's own admission, is dying a natural death from lack of interest, so why bother banning it. A friend in Miami said the Magic City Casino, formerly the dog racing park, only had one month of dog races this year and has introduced jai alai in its place. So let dog racing die on its own and don't bother with changing the constitution for it.
I voted no on all of them. Time and time again, I tried to research these state amendments only to discover that the detailed language of the amendments had little to do with the advertising of the amendments. These are simply ways for special interests to do an end run around the legislature (and sometimes the legislature submits these).
I did the exact same thing. None of them belong in the Constitution, and should be determined by the Legislature--that's what we pay/elect them for.
